Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34232320›Full record

ArticleNeuro-oncology2022

A novel patient stratification strategy to enhance the therapeutic efficacy of dasatinib in glioblastoma.

Obada T Alhalabi, Michael N C Fletcher, Thomas Hielscher, Tobias Kessler, Tolga Lokumcu, Ulrich Baumgartner, Elena Wittmann, Silja Schlue, Mona Göttmann, Shaman Rahman and 10 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuro-oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Glioma Cell Membrane-Coated CaCOInternational journal of nanomedicine · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Obada T AlhalabiBrain Tumor Translational Targets, DKFZ Junior Group, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Michael N C FletcherDivision of Molecular Genetics, Heidelberg Center for Personalized Oncology, German Cancer Research Consortium, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Thomas HielscherDivision of Biostatistics (C060), German Cancer Research Center, DE.
Tobias KesslerDepartment of Neurology and Neurooncology Program; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Tolga LokumcuBrain Tumor Translational Targets, DKFZ Junior Group, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Ulrich BaumgartnerCell and Molecular Biology Department, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Sid Faithfull Brain Cancer Laboratory, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Elena WittmannBrain Tumor Translational Targets, DKFZ Junior Group, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Silja SchlueBrain Tumor Translational Targets, DKFZ Junior Group, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Mona GöttmannBrain Tumor Translational Targets, DKFZ Junior Group, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Shaman RahmanBrain Tumor Translational Targets, DKFZ Junior Group, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Ling HaiJunior Research Group Bioinformatics and Omics Data Analytics, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Lea Hansen-PalmusBrain Tumor Translational Targets, DKFZ Junior Group, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Laura PuccioBrain Tumor Translational Targets, DKFZ Junior Group, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Ichiro NakanoDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, USA.
Christel Herold-MendeDepartment of Neurosurgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Bryan W DayCell and Molecular Biology Department, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Sid Faithfull Brain Cancer Laboratory, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Wolfgang WickClinical Cooperation Unit Neurooncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6171-634X
Felix SahmDepartment of Neuropathology, Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Emma PhillipsBrain Tumor Translational Targets, DKFZ Junior Group, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
Violaine GoidtsBrain Tumor Translational Targets, DKFZ Junior Group, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9046-4893
German Cancer Research Center · DEHeidelberg University · DEThe University of Queensland · AUCancer Research Center · USUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlioblastoma is the most common primary malignancy of the central nervous system with a dismal prognosis. Genomic signatures classify isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH)-wildtype glioblastoma into three subtypes: proneural, mesenchymal, and classical. Dasatinib, an inhibitor of proto-oncogene kinase Src (SRC), is one of many therapeutics which, despite promising preclinical results, have failed to improve overall survival in glioblastoma patients in clinical trials. We examined whether glioblastoma subtypes differ in their response to dasatinib and could hence be evaluated for patient enrichment strategies in clinical trials.

methodsWe carried out in silico analyses on glioblastoma gene expression (TCGA) and single-cell RNA-Seq data. In addition, in vitro experiments using glioblastoma stem-like cells (GSCs) derived from primary patient tumors were performed, with complementary gene expression profiling and immunohistochemistry analysis of tumor samples.

resultsPatients with the mesenchymal subtype of glioblastoma showed higher SRC pathway activation based on gene expression profiling. Accordingly, mesenchymal GSCs were more sensitive to SRC inhibition by dasatinib compared to proneural and classical GSCs. Notably, SRC phosphorylation status did not predict response to dasatinib treatment. Furthermore, serpin peptidase inhibitor clade H member 1 (SERPINH1), a collagen-related heat-shock protein associated with cancer progression, was shown to correlate with dasatinib response and with the mesenchymal subtype.

conclusionThis work highlights further molecular-based patient selection strategies in clinical trials and suggests the mesenchymal subtype as well as SERPINH1 to be associated with response to dasatinib. Our findings indicate that stratification based on gene expression subtyping should be considered in future dasatinib trials.

Indexed as

GlioblastomaCell Line, TumorDasatinibGene Expression ProfilingHumansPrognosisProtein Kinase Inhibitorssrc-Family KinasesDasatinibProtein Kinase Inhibitorssrc-Family Kinasesdasatinibglioblastomaglioblastoma stem-like cellsSERPINH1SRC

Identifiers

PMID34232320
PMCPMC8730774
OpenAlexW3179834435

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.